Mini Must-Have: Violet Affleck’s Cute Doll Carrier

06/27/2010 at 11:00 AM ET

A stellar smile isn’t the only thing Violet Affleck gets from mom Jennifer Garner.

The spunky 4½-year-old is also a fan of babywearing — except with dolls.

She keeps her mini friends cuddled close with MyWallaby‘s adorable Doll Carrier ($40) in cotton candy.

Not only does it unfold into a roomy pouch that easily fits a standard 18″ doll, but it features satin-lined front pocket to store doll-friendly accessories.

Get one for your little princess at

— Anya Leon

RELATED: Jen & Ben: Five Years of Family and Ben & Jen: So Happy Together!

Share this story:

Your reaction:

Add A Comment reserves the right to remove comments at their discretion.

Showing 25 comments

Liz on

She looks totally ticked off in this picture. Like why dont’t these people just stop following me and my parents around. She is too young to realize that this total invasion of privacy and lack of common decency all boils down to the mighty dollar. Does this even register with those that “benefit” from the celebs, or do they just ignore that? Do they ever feel a bad?

It’s one thing for the celebs the clamor for attention like the Kardashians, but it crosses the line when people are doing everyday stuff out of the limelight (or at least trying). Wish pics would only be taken at events, not hounding them like the fish in a fish bowl. Can’t see that happening if there is still money to be made.

Brooke on

I agree with you, Liz

lila on

They could always chose a more discrete place to live. Many people do it why they cant?

DJ on

They should be able to live where they want without constantly being hounded by the paparazzi.

Liz on

In my opinion, why should they have to move to have a more normal life. Hollywood (and to a lesser degree NY) is where their industry is. Where shows are filmed etc. And, many stars are hunted down while on vacation etc.

Now when a famous person goes to a big openeing, a new hip restuarant, or hot spot like Nobu, the Ivy etc…. sure there will be photogs. And, that can be expected. That is really part of the business. But if they are trying to do their shopping, taking a walk, going to the dentist, picking up their kids from a party — then they are being hunted down all to meet the insatiable need of “what are they doing, wearing, etc”. In my opinion, that is where common decency gets tossed out the window. Becuase if we didn’t have photos how we we know what the person is eating for dinner, how they like their latte, whether they have large pores, a flat stomach, and what are those beautiful shoes and where can we get them? But in my opinion, at their price of being followed all the time. But that doesn’t seem to have much impact.

Now I have no sympathy for some that crave the attention (and work with the papaparazzi to keep their photos in the press), or act outrageously. But for the most part, that is not the case.

I certainly bet that the photogs, and those that make money off the pics, buy the picturs etc — wouldn’t want to be followed around and have their family (and lives) on display.

I wonder what the editors of this blog think and would love to get their input. I will say that this site is leaps and bounds better than most, and very respectful in many cases, but they too in my opinion, benefit financially (since that’s what the site is — news and photos) by showing pics of stars whether they are in the spotlight (like at an opening) or at a playground.

It’s a whole industry that thrives by it, but if people didn’t buy into it (can’t see that happening unfortunately)then it would certainly greatly reduce and their would be more normalcy. Is it right (and I guess legal) simply becuase they are out in public? Sure it might be legal to snap the pic, doesn’t make it right.

Terri on

She doesn’t look happy or upset to me. Violet is adorable.

Jessica on

That is the cutest bag and a really good idea. That way you don’t get stuck carrying plastic baby!!!

Get over it Liz.

I’m so tired of all these celebrities whining about their invasion on privacy. If you are so concerned with their privacy than why are you looking at people magazine? Because all it contains is information on celebs.

That’s the point, they made a choice. Acting is a career AND a choice. Just like some people make the choice to work in whatever field they chose and sacrifice things. Doctors sacrific normal lives and their families. I grew up in a home with a father that was a ER Dr and i saw him maybe 20% of my 27 years in earth. But when he complained that he missed seeing me grow up, he missed a lot of things, i reminded him that he made a choice, as did all these celebrities.

It’s so funny because people want to rag on the Kardashians and Kendra so much for having reality shows. But these so called “fame seekers” arn’t complaining, they realize that in their business that’s what they sacrifice is their privacy. Then there are people who complain non stop to try to get more attention. She lives in the greater LA Area, she is going to be followed around.

Her family is adoarable and also very popular. Regardless of where they are people have a natural curiosity of what they are doing. If we paid no attention to them, they’d have no career!!! And as i repeat myself, if you are so high and mighty and oh so concerned about the privacy of celebrities than don’t read because that’s what it’s about is celebrities.

Erin on

Liz, you are so on the money. On every point. I’ve mentioned before that I work in LA at one of the big talent agencies (in the legal department) and I hear about this issue all the time from actors. One school of thought is that certain celebrity parents make it infinitely more difficult for others when they basically “shop” their kids out by dragging them to super public places (The Ivy, The Grove, Robertson Blvd., etc.) knowing the paparazzi are going to be out in force. Worse are the parents who notify the snaps themselves (through assistants, nannies, trainers, etc.) about where they and their kids are going to be! That type of active courting of the paps leads to a mindset that all celebrities must want the same kind of attention, even during their “off” time. The same person who uses their kid as a prop (particularly the ones who seem to be most trying to protect them with bodyguards, entourages, car convoys, et al) are the ones crying most loudly and publicly about how much they abhor the press. It would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic! (The Afflecks are NOT an example of who I’m speaking about) I sit across from these folk and have to keep from calling them out. Maybe if I ever move on from this gig, like on my last day or something, I will! Go all Lloyd from Entourage on them! Anyway, I’m venting. Just wanted to give Liz the most-sane-rational-comment-of-the-year award!

Lisa on

I agree with Jessica. You make the choice to be an actor, and with that comes the paps. Either get over it or retire. What aggravates me, also, is when actors want private lives until they have something to promote. Then all bets are off, and they’re whoring out their kids’ pictures.

Anna on

Liz, if you feel so bad about it you should boycott websites like this one and the magazines that print the photos. The paps only take the photos because they get paid for them.

I think the celebs made a choice when they chose this career. They make millions and for that privilige they give up some privacy. btw there are plenty of celebs that manage to avoid the paps.

Sarah on

I am with you Liz! I used to be on the other side of the fence.. even ran my own celebrity babies website way back before this one even started up. But now that I am a Mother I cannot look at these pictures the same way.

And for the record.. PEOPLE isn’t ONLY about celebrities Jessica.

Lucy on

What a cutie! If you don’t support them being photographed then why are you here?

Liz on

I posted my comments to express that not everyone thinks its ok to take pics of celebs to mark their every move. Maybe there would be a conscious change, if people thought about how things are done and expressed their opinions. I have no problem in truthful articles and pics, I’m just saying sometimes it goes way to far. Really do you need to take a pic, buy a pic etc of a star and her kids leaving a drs office. Or, do you not find it comical when reading or watching an entertainment show, and they report that person X picked up a Greek Salad for lunch. Oooh, that’s news.

Sure if you go into entertainment you will be in the public eye to some degree, but with the tech changes and the fact that everyone has a camera…things have changed dramatically. But things have gone way over the line in the past few years in my opinion.

Really just because you are famouus your medical privacy has to be invaded, every action dissected, photos of your families every move taken. I don’t think it gives the paparazzi and mags etc free reign.

Sure some stars are better at keeping out of the limelight, but to some degree, stars are “hounded” based on the publics curiosity. There is such an interest in some stars…look at the outfit, has she lost her baby weight, is that an engagement ring on her finger, look at the Prada bag she is wearing…. that it increases the buzz. Is there more interst in whether some star lost the baby weight (articles and tv shows galore), and what star just went on a diet or to see a pic of Meryl Street coming out of a shoe store?

I would be interested to see what the editors of this blog think. Or, do they simply see it as all biz.

Erin on

Liz, you need to stop now. You are making too much sense! Life is not black and white. And I wonder if people who don’t think some (only some) celebs have the right to legitimate complaint also think the President’s kids (no matter which President) can’t expect any privacy because – hey, mommy and daddy signed up for the gig. Or Bill Gates’ kids. Or Tiger Woods’ kids. Not everything can/should be explained/excused away with a “they asked for this life.”

Mandy on

I thought the industry was about talent, not popularity or interest in daily activities.

m-dot on

she looks just like ben in this pic! i’d always thought she was her mom’s clone.

Tee on

Jessica and Liz- I see both sides on this issue and in a way, I agree with both of you. Yes, these people choose to have a career that goes hand in hand with minimal privacy. On the other hand, it is often taken too far and the photographers are too aggressive a lot of the time.

What bothers me about your comment, Jessica, is how rudely you came across towards Liz. She stated her opinion very nicely. I’m sorry, but I don’t think her comment warrented you telling her to “get over it” or calling her “high and mighty.” I’m curious as to why you couldn’t state your opposing position without being rude?

Violet is as cute as they come! I love her little doll carrier/purse!

Inge on

Yes the parents choose a job that puts you on display. But the kids didnt choose this life.. they just have to live with it.
So just photograph the parents and leave the kids alone.
I enjoy reading here about the kids and the events, but i wouldnt care if there arent any paparazzi shots anymore.

Jessie on

I could’ve sworn this post was about violet’s doll carrier, not a debate on whether the paps should take pics or respect the kid’s privacy

Anna on

They changed the photo to a happy one so now the comments sounds strange….

back to the topic.. on

WOW!! $40 for a doll carrier is a bit much!! My kids had my old purses and old book bags and they worked fine

Gi on

CNN, why did you change the post?

Gi on

Should say cbb but my automatic spell check changed it?

leslie gorga on

thanks for the clarification, anna! i was very confused, because in the current accompanying photo, she looks happy to me.

Marina on

I’m with Liz. She is just saying that some parts of they life should be published (such as which school the kids go, that is just crazy!)